Proposing a commanding and systematic Chinese teachingphilosophy is an essential requirement for constructing a teaching theory with Chinese characteristics.The philosophy of ″teaching for non-teaching″ represents one such attempt.This teaching philosophy has deep roots in ancient Chinese pedagogical thought.For instance,Confucianism activates intellectual autonomy through heuristic teaching characterized by ″timely intervention″;Mohism cultivates capability autonomy through a practice-oriented approach of ″active adaptation″;Taoism nurtures personal autonomy through the philosophy of ″non-action(wu-wei)″ featuring ″natural restraint″.Each tradition explores the dialectical relationship between the ″boundaries of teaching″ and the ″autonomy of learning″,aiming to achieve the ultimate goal of ″teaching for non-teaching″.The philosophy of ″teaching for non-teaching″ embodies dialectical and inter-subjective philosophical perspectives.Its fundamental tenets include a teleologyfocused on cultivating learners′ capacity for ″self-acquisition″,a process theory emphasizing the ″mutual growth of teaching and learning″ between educators and learners,and a methodology that integrates educators′ ″skillful teaching″ with learners′ ″skillful learning″.This philosophy not only empowers teaching in the digital-intelligence era but also offers new possibilities for practice enriched by digital-intelligent technologies.To effectively implement thephilosophy of ″teaching for non-teaching″ in the digital-intelligence era,educators should strengthen the cultivation of learners′ lifelong learning capacity,dispel misconceptions about ″teaching for non-teaching″,emphasize the artof pedagogical withdrawal,and enhance the quality of learners′ ″self-directedlearning and self-acquisition″.
Key words
″teaching for non-teaching″ /
autonomous knowledge inChinese teaching theory /
traditional Chinese pedagogical thought /
digital-intelligence teaching /
lifelong learning capacity /
the art of pedagogical withdrawal
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
[1] 习近平.加快构建中国特色哲学社会科学[M]//习近平著作选读:第1卷.北京:人民出版社,2023:478.
[2] 习近平在中国人民大学考察时强调 坚持党的领导传承红色基因扎根中国大地走出一条建设中国特色世界一流大学新路[N].人民日报,2022-04-26(1).
[3] 李栋.中国教育学理论体系的建构[J].华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),2025,43(6):21-37.
[4] 刘亭亭.中国课程论学术话语体系自主构建的目标、逻辑与路径[J].课程·教材·教法,2025,45(3):47-54.
[5] 刘旭东,王志鹏.论构建中国化教学论学科话语体系的历史和实践基础[J].课程·教材·教法,2025,45(3):4-12.
[6] 陈尚达.启发教学中的对话理念及其启示[J].全球教育展望,2015,44(10):16-23,33.
[7] 罗祖兵.因材施教的双重结构及其价值选择[J].教育学报,2023,19(1):40-51.
[8] 刘铁芳,罗典.兴发:一个教育学的中国概念[J].全球教育展望,2025,54(1):3-24.
[9] 吕不韦.吕氏春秋[M].南京:江苏凤凰美术出版社,2017:215.
[10] 叶圣陶.叶圣陶语文教育论集[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2015:112.
[11] 道德经[M].李安刚,译注.北京:中国社会出版社,2003.
[12] 李泽厚.论语今读[M].北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2004:194-195.
[13] 曲铁华.中国教育发展史纲[M].长春:东北师范大学出版社,2006:291.
[14] 方勇,译注.墨子[M].北京:中华书局,2011.
[15] 学记[M].高时良,译注.北京:人民教育出版社,2016.
[16] 毛乐,鄢超云.我国古代“以水喻教”思想及其根源[J].全球教育展望,2021,50(9):32-45.
[17] 侯怀银.中国教育学学科体系、学术体系和话语体系的内涵及其关系[J].教育研究,2024,45(4):52-61.
[18] 中庸[M].刘强,编译.哈尔滨:哈尔滨出版社,2007:191.
[19] 冯建军.主体教育理论:从主体性到主体间性[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2006(1):115-121.
[20] 张玮瑶.教育现代化的现代性价值旨趣及危机消解[J].教育与教学研究,2025,39(1):37-49.
[21] 吴松.基于“交互主体性”与“存在之真理”的教学理念:“教为不教,学为创造”作为教学理念再诠释[J].云南大学学报(社会科学版),2006(4):84-93,96.
[22] 庄子[M].孙海通,译注.北京:中华书局,2007:55.
[23] 陈隆升.学情分析论[M].上海:上海交通大学出版社,2019:47.
[24] 黄士毅.朱子语类集注[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2014:157.
[25] 康永久.孔子为什么不搞启发式教育[J].全球教育展望,2025,54(1):36-51.
[26] 杨伯峻,译注.孟子译注[M].北京:中华书局,2016:206.
[27] 刘良华.从启发教学到兴发教学:中国教学改革的三个传统[J].全球教育展望,2025,54(1):25-35.
[28] 潘新民.知识转化为素养:体验教学何以可能[J].课程·教材·教法,2025,45(5):58-65.
[29] 汪丽梅.知识观变革:教学方法改革的内在推动力[M].武汉:华中师范大学出版社,2018:60.
[30] 邱钰超.未来学习环境视域下教师教学转型理路研究[J].教育与教学研究,2025,39(5):68-82.
[31] 中共中央 国务院印发《教育强国建设规划纲要(2024—2035年)》[EB/OL].(2025-02)[2025-09-10].https://www.gov.cn/gongbao/2025/issue-11846/202502/content-7002799.html.
[32] 谌衡.“引而不发”与“不射之射”:儒道“不教之教”的教育教学问题[J].湖南师范大学教育科学学报,2019,18(2):71-80.
[33] 牛宝荣.为思维而教:数智时代知识教学的机遇、挑战与应对[J].电化教育研究,2024,45(10):86-91.
[34] 龙庆,吴支奎.数智时代生命取向的教学反思与重构[J].电化教育研究,2025,46(6):29-34.
PDF(2078 KB)
